Commons:Propositions d'images remarquables

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Les règles des Propositions d'images remarquables ont changé.
Conformément aux règles générales, une image est promue avec 7 (sept) votes "support" ou plus (et un ratio de 2/1 de # supports/opposes) et le nombre de nominations actives par utilisateur est limité à 2 (deux)
Désormais, seuls peuvent voter les membres inscrits depuis plus de 10 jours ayant procédé à au moins 50 interventions dans "Commons"


Skip to current candidates Aller directement aux propositions en cours

Cette page recense les images qui sont proposées pour être affichées dans les Images remarquables. Notez qu'il ne s'agit pas de la même chose que l'image du jour ou que les images de qualité.

Les archives des votes précédents se trouvent sur cette page.

Il existe également une liste chronologique des images remarquables.

Voir aussi les Images de qualité, les propositions d'images de qualité et les critiques photographiques.

Procédure[edit]

Conseils avant de proposer une image[edit]

partie en cours de traduction depuis la version anglaise, votre avis est le bienvenu.
Lisez entièrement le guide avant de commencer
Quelques règles informelles à retenir avant de proposer une image (les termes en italiques sont la traduction anglaise des termes).

  • Définition (display resolution) : les images de Commons peuvent être utilisées sur d'autres supports qu'un écran d'ordinateur, par exemple pour être imprimées ou vues à très haute résolution. Il est important que les images proposées aient la plus haute résolution possible. Au moins 2 millions de pixels (par ex. 2000 x 1000) semble raisonnable à présent. Les images de définition inférieure sont systématiquement rejetées sauf s'il y a une bonne raison.
  • Mise au point (focus) : tous les objets importants de l'image devraient être nets. Dans l'idéal les objets non primordiaux sont nets.
  • Avant-plan et arrière-plan (background and foreground): ils peuvent être dérangeants. Le sujet principal ne devrait pas être caché par le premier plan, ni se confondre avec l'arrière-plan.
  • Qualité générale (general quality) : Les images proposées devraient avoir une très haute qualité technique.
  • Une retouche (digital manipulations) ne doit pas tromper l'observateur. La correction de quelques défauts dans l'image est acceptée pour autant que ce soit limité, bien fait, et non pour tromper. Les retouches courantes sont le recadrage, la correction de la perspective, de netteté, des couleurs ou de l'exposition. Des manipulations plus importantes, tels quel l'élimination d'éléments dans l'arrière plan, doivent être décrites dans la description de l'image, par le biais du modèle {{RetouchedPicture}}. Les retouches non décrites ou mal décrites qui transformeraient le sujet sont inacceptables.
  • Utilité (value) : notre but principal est de présenter des images utiles et précieuses. Les images devraient ainsi être spéciales d'une façon ou d'une autre, donc, entre autres :
    • La plupart des coucher de soleil sont beaux, et la plupart ne sont pas différents des autres existant déjà.
    • Les photos de nuit sont souvent belles mais davantage de détails sont visibles de jour.
    • "Beau" ne veut pas dire "utile".

Au niveau technique, nous avons l'exposition, la composition, le mouvement et la profondeur du champ.

  • L'exposition (exposure) est l'obturation du diaphragme qui modifie la luminosité (brightness) pour rendre avec qualité les ombres et les lumières au sein de l'image. Le manque d'ombres dans le détail n'est pas nécessairement négatif, cela peut être un effet désiré.
  • La composition (composition) est l'arrangement des éléments dans l'image. La "Règle de trois" est un bon guide pour la composition, c'est un héritage des écoles de peintures. L'idée est de diviser l'image par deux lignes horizontales et deux lignes verticales, nous avons donc trois parties dans chaque sens. L'objet ne doit pas forcément être centré. Les sujets intéressants doivent êtres placés aux 4 croisements des lignes. L'horizon ne doit jamais être mis au milieu, car il couperait l'image en deux. L'idée principale ici est de rendre l'image dynamique.
  • Netteté (sharpness) renvoie à la manière dont les mouvements sont représentés dans l'image. Ils peuvent être nets ou flous. Ils ne sont pas mieux l'un que l'autre, cela dépend de l'intention du photographe. L'impression de mouvement dépend des différents objets de l'image. Par exemple, photographier une voiture de course qui apparaît nette par rapport à l'arrière plan ne donne pas une idée de la vitesse. Il faudrait en fait que la voiture soit représentée nette, mais avec un arrière plan flou, créant ainsi le mouvement. D'un autre coté, représenter le saut d'un joueur de basket net avec le reste de l'image flou, en raison de la nature peu habituelle de la photo, lui conférerait de l'intérêt.
  • La profondeur de champ (depth of field or DOF) renvoie à la zone de mise au point devant et au delà du sujet principal. La profondeur de champ est choisie en fonction des besoins spécifiques à chaque image. Une profondeur grande ou petite peut améliorer ou dégrader la qualité de l'image. Une faible profondeur de champ peut attirer l'attention sur le sujet principal, en le séparant de son environnement. Les lentilles à petite distance focale (grand angle) ont une grande profondeur de champ, et vice versa, les lentilles à grande distance focale (petite ouverture) ont une petite profondeur de champ.

Proposition[edit]

Si vous pensez avoir trouvé ou créé une image qui puisse être considérée comme parmi les meilleures de Commons, avec une description et une licence appropriée, copiez le nom de l'image dans la boîte ci-dessous (en incluant le préfixe File:), après le texte déjà présent :


Après cela, vous devrez insérer un lien vers la page que vous venez de créer en haut de Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.

Vote[edit]

A l'exclusion de tous autres, vous pouvez utiliser les modèles suivants:

  • {{Pour}} (Symbol support vote.svg Support),
  • {{Contre}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose),

Ainsi que :

  • {{Neutre}} (Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral),
  • {{Comment}} (Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment),
  • {{Info}} (Pictogram voting info.svg Info),
  • {{Question}} (Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question).


IMPORTANT: veuillez notamment NE PAS UTILISER les modèles {{weak support}} (GA candidate.svg Weak support) ni {{weak oppose}} (BA candidate.svg Weak oppose), ils ne sont pas reconnus par le robot, et votre vote serait considéré comme non valide.

Merci d'inclure quelques mots expliquant pourquoi vous soutenez ou non la promotion de l'image, surtout si vous votez contre. N'oubliez pas de signer avec ~~~~.

Règles[edit]

Règles générales[edit]

  1. Le résultat est donné 9 jours après la proposition (voir le planning en bas de page). Les votes ajoutés le 10e jour ou après ne sont pas décomptés.
  2. Les utilisateurs non-enregistrés peuvent proposer des images, faire des commentaires, mais pas voter.
  3. La proposition elle-même ne compte pas comme un vote : il faut l'ajouter explicitement.
  4. Le proposant peut retirer une image à tout moment, en écrivant : {{Withdraw}} ~~~~
  5. Souvenez-vous que le but de Wikimedia Commons est une bibliothèque pour tous les projets Wikimedia, y compris des projets futurs ; les images n'ont pas à être utiles uniquement pour Wikipédia.
  6. Les images peuvent être retirées de la liste dès le 5e jour si elles n'ont reçu aucun vote "pour".
  7. Soyez attentifs et très sélectifs dans les choix que vous faites, car il ne peut y avoir que deux propositions actives par proposant. Toute proposition supplémentaire sera rejetée sans examen.
  8. Seulement 2 nominations actives par même utilisateur (qui est, en nomination sous "review" et non encore close) sont autorisées. Le principal but de cette mesure est de contribuer à une meilleure qualité moyenne des nominations, par un choix plus judicieux des photos présentes en nominations.

Règles de promotion[edit]

L'image candidate devient une image remarquable si elle remplit les conditions suivantes :

  1. Une licence appropriée (bien sûr !)
  2. Au moins sept votes "pour".
  3. un ratio de 2/1 de votes "pour"/"contre".
  4. Deux versions différentes de la même image ne peuvent pas être promues en même temps, mais seulement celle avec le plus grand score.

Contestations[edit]

Avec le temps, les critères d'évaluation évoluent, et il peut être décidé qu'une image qui était auparavant assez bonne pour être dans la liste ne peut plus l'être.

Pour qu'une image soit déchue, il faut qu'une majorité de 2/3 avec au moins 5 votes accepte de retirer l'image, autrement elle reste "remarquable". Pour voter, utiliser les modèles {{Keep}} (Symbol keep vote.svg Keep : mérite de rester "remarquable") ou {{Delist}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist  : ne mérite plus le label).

Pour contester une image, copiez son nom avec le préfixe dans la boîte ci-dessous à la suite du texte déjà présent :


Vous devriez inclure les informations suivantes :

  • Informations sur l'origine de l'image (créateur, importateur).
  • Un lien vers le vote d'origine.
  • La raison pour laquelle vous contestez le label, avec votre signature.

Insérez ensuite un lien en haut de Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal.

Sommaire[edit]

Contents

Pour ajouter votre proposition à la liste[edit]

Pour ajouter votre proposition à la liste, cliquez ici et ajoutez votre proposition en haut de la liste : {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:FILENAME}}

Propositions en cours[edit]

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Darwin (AU), Stokes Hill Wharf -- 2019 -- 4362.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2019 at 06:35:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stokes Hill Wharf in Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Australia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 06:35, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Just an information: The objects in the front are in the sun, the background is dark because of the rain clouds. Wonderful light conditions. --XRay talk 09:56, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 06:35, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:43, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Perfect light, perfect sky, perfect colours. I really like this a lot. --Basotxerri (talk) 09:36, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBijay chaurasia (talk) 11:23, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Adenium obesum.jpeg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2019 at 01:14:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Adenium obesum

File:Nuluujaak Mountain.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2019 at 01:07:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nuluujaak Mountain

File:Morning at Tham Sakoen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Dec 2019 at 18:05:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Morning at Tham Sakoen
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural#Thailand
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A spectacular image of natural beauty, and one which did well in Wiki Loves Earth 2019. created by Jane3030 - uploaded by Jane3030 - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 18:05, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 18:05, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 19:59, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice atmosphere. Charles (talk) 20:13, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Karelj (talk) 20:40, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Please remove the dust spots --Wilfredor (talk) 20:42, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Yes to what Wilfredor said above. I will vote for this when the spots are removed, but if they aren't removed, I would sadly have to oppose. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:45, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree. Charles (talk) 22:27, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm not 100% certain I have solved this problem as when I viewed it at full size I'm afraid I couldn't see huge numbers of dust spots. I saw a few darker smudges caused by dirt on the lens, but not a massive number of obvious spots. That said I think the problem is sorted, so @Ikan Kekek:, @Charlesjsharp:, @Wilfredor:, could you take a look and see whether it is any better? If not, I would appreciate a more specific note about where you can still see dust spots. Cmao20 (talk) 23:15, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • It looks to me like you got most of them, but I still see a big one where I just marked it. Have a look. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:18, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • It took me three minutes, but I've finally found something that could be (maybe? maybe not) a very tiny dust spot (almost invisible). Good luck, Cmao20 :-) Almost all paintings in every museum also contain some very small bristles of the brush, lost and mixed with the painting. Some even say these bristles belong to the beard of the famous masters. When I was young, it was a challenge to chase them, by sticking my eyes very close to the canvas, but I'm not sure the guards would have let me remove them Face-grin.svg -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:23, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Mediaeval Screenwork, North, Church of St Peter and St Paul, East Harling.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Dec 2019 at 18:03:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mediaeval screenwork, Church of St Peter and St Paul
  • I certainly haven't nominated anything like this lately, but we may have had something of the kind, I honestly don't recall. If anyone can find a similar nom please link to it, but I don't see any other FPs of this subject from my own search. Cmao20 (talk) 22:57, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Certainly good quality and deservedly QI but I can’t see anything wowy here. --Kreuzschnabel 23:11, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Kreuzschnabel. --GRDN711 (talk) 23:40, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Steam engine in Karchowice (Karchowitz).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2019 at 20:52:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Steam engine in Karchowice (Karchowitz), Upper Silesia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 20:52, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 20:52, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very dark, haze in the background, nothing distinguishable -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:13, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Basile. Nice mood but all I see is a noisy image of cut-off machinery in hazy conditions and poor contrast. Verticals are irritatingly leaning out (at least the lamp chain should be perpendicular). I can’t see any excellent photographic work here. Sorry. --Kreuzschnabel 09:28, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes, whatever the outcome, I think the lamp chain should be vertical. Unless it is intended to oscillate like a pendulum :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:41, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support I like the mood very much but the haziness of everything is a bit distracting. Cmao20 (talk) 17:21, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Nice mood, but overall the picture is not FP for me (per the others). --Domob (talk) 17:41, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. --GRDN711 (talk) 23:42, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Bergtocht van Prasüras,door het Val Trupchun naar Alp Purcher 18-09-2019. (d.j.b) 18.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2019 at 16:27:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Old hut/Switzerland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Maybe too simple for FP. But the building blends in beautifully with the landscape. With the sturdy picnic table in front.
    All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:27, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:27, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sharp photo, but not really interesting, no wow for me --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:13, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice. -- -donald- (talk) 07:31, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Surely nice but not excellent IMHO. The sunlit wall looks overexposed, at least washed out, and I’d prefer to see what the shadow on the right comes from. Also, I’d prefer less space on the left and more on the right to support the direction the house "looks" into. --Kreuzschnabel 09:32, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yeah it looks all right, but nothing really extraordinary.--Peulle (talk) 13:33, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per nomination. Cmao20 (talk) 17:20, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Nice scene, but not special enough for FP for me. (Especially the flat grass in the front seems a bit boring to me.) --Domob (talk) 17:42, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not special enough, just a good QI -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:13, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Bergtocht van Prasüras,door het Val Trupchun naar Alp Purcher 18-09-2019. (d.j.b) 18 Alt.jpg

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Famberhorst (talk) 18:00, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not special enough, just a good QI -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:13, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Basile Morin. --GRDN711 (talk) 23:44, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Passerelle Debilly, Paris 5 November 2019.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2019 at 12:38:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Passerelle Debilly, Paris, France.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ali Sabbagh (Flickr) - uploaded and nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 12:38, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 12:38, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The bridge is nice but the image doesn't seem very outstanding for me. IMO if you include that much sky, it should be interesting enough. Please remove the CAs. --Basotxerri (talk) 16:15, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Baso (and nice to see you, man; it feels like it's been a while). Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:18, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with the above. I also find the image quality a little mediocre with some CA visible in the water. Good image overall, but not FP for me. Cmao20 (talk) 17:19, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per the others. Quite good (although not outstanding) quality and an interesting bridge, but not special enough for FP. --Domob (talk) 17:43, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others; also noticeable CA near sides. Might have worked, at least better, in direct sunlight. Daniel Case (talk) 19:12, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Jaguar Mark V drophead coupé - Charleroi 2019 - 08.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2019 at 11:33:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Leaper of a 3½ litre Jaguar Mark V drophead coupé.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Automobiles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jmh2o - uploaded by Jmh2o - nominated by Jmh2o -- H2O(talk) 11:33, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- H2O(talk) 11:33, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 13:47, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I love it, and it's an unusual, creative composition, a really good way to depict this hood ornament. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:20, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice subject but distracting background. The head of the jaguar looks like a hook -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:09, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose per Basile – the unlucky background spoils it in my eyes too. Pity, otherwise I’d really support it. Any more shots of this fine motif from a slightly different angle? --Kreuzschnabel 09:35, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. Cmao20 (talk) 17:18, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support The background is indeed not ideal, but I'd still support the picture as it is. --Domob (talk) 17:44, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support All the background lines do, for me, is accentuate those in the foreground. Daniel Case (talk) 19:06, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Basile Poco a poco (talk) 11:47, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Untere Stuhllochscharte.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2019 at 15:46:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Untere Stuhllochscharte winter view
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Grtek - uploaded by Grtek - nominated by Grtek -- Grtek (talk) 15:46, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Grtek (talk) 15:46, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Basotxerri (talk) 17:06, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 18:55, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Domob (talk) 19:22, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unusual. But I can not take any information from this image, which is really inspiring me or help me to learn anything about this gap. Nothing special about the Gosaukamm. Interchangeable. It could be anywhere in the high mountains. --Milseburg (talk) 20:36, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like this because I really feel the cold and desolation. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:45, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Seven Pandas (talk) 23:33, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice candidate for BW conversion. -- King of ♠ 02:08, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:29, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:02, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Bijay chaurasia (talk) 09:59, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Milsebug + I do not support BW-images in repositories like Commons. —kallerna (talk) 13:27, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Sorry to say, but if more people felt like you, FPC would be even deader - from an artistic / truly photographic point of view - than it already is (I've always wanted to use this comparative Face-wink.svg ). We're rapidly turning into a sterile, formalistic, pixel peeping tech forum that doesn't really care about unique perspectives - literally and figuratively - or bold approaches. Just my two cents. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:54, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Yep, truer words have seldom been spoken here! --Cart (talk) 09:48, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • On the other side: I think lately too little attention has been paid to whether the candidates have an outstanding benefit in the encyclopedic projects. Sober, factual presentations have a harder time compared to images whose artistic aspect repress the factual. --Milseburg (talk) 14:53, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • True, Commons serves a media repository for wikis of all kinds and scopes. But there is certainly no lack of straightforward, high quality depictions of the factual world (cityscapes, nature, animals...). Yet Commons could and should be so, so much more...! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:17, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ermell (talk) 20:07, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the way the little motes of snow dance in the sun ... something that you can only see when pixel-peeping, and something the black and white makes better.Face-wink.svg Daniel Case (talk) 15:49, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 15:55, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. Commons should encompass all kinds of quality material, not just what is suitable for an encyclopedia. This is a high quality shot that illustrates good use of B&W very well. Cmao20 (talk) 17:15, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Indeed, but we also don't know which good photos may serve an encyclopedia well. There have been hilarious cases of photos that had a hard time as unsuitable for an encyclopedia that ended up illustrating Wikipedia articles very well. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:48, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Sydney (AU), Opera House -- 2019 -- 3049.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2019 at 14:58:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Roof of the Opera House, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Australia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 14:58, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 14:58, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting view, but for me this composition does not really work. I would like to have "something more". Sorry. --Domob (talk) 19:25, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I just have to say, this looks like a worm's-eye view of the world's largest bustier. Daniel Case (talk) 02:05, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Domob.--Peulle (talk) 08:03, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Domob. Daniel Case (talk) 15:42, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I see what you were going for and I like to see abstract stuff like this at FPC, but this one doesn't work for me. The various crops just look a bit awkward, and I've seen better studies of shapes, lines and colours than this. Cmao20 (talk) 17:14, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination I think it is better to withdraw. --XRay talk 17:23, 13 December 2019 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--XRay talk 17:27, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Spb StMichael Castle asv2019-09 img11.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2019 at 13:20:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Oval Hall of St. Michael's Castle
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Russia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Oval Hall of Saint Michael's Castle, Saint Petersburg. All by A.Savin --A.Savin 13:20, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 13:20, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Pretty, well-composed, excellent light management. A few places might be slightly sharper, such as the ceiling decorations that are partly covered by the "candlelights", but overall, I think this is quite clearly an FP by 2019 standards. Is there something I'm missing that's causing anyone to hesitate to support? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:51, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great, excellent -- Je-str (talk) 09:50, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:17, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Basotxerri (talk) 16:17, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 20:10, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolf im Wald 03:43, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:28, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The very tight cut on the lettering at the top left is disadvantageous --Milseburg (talk) 15:44, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 15:54, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support Could be sharper in some places, but overall interesting enough for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 17:12, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:01, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Quality is good but the hall is not really wowing to me Poco a poco (talk) 11:55, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

File:The coast of Crete Sea near Chania. Crete, Greece.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2019 at 12:13:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The coast of Crete Sea near Chania. Crete, Greece
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ввласенко - uploaded by Ввласенко - nominated by Ввласенко -- Ввласенко (talk) 12:13, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice, I suppose, but I'm not seeing any big wow factor here.--Peulle (talk) 13:39, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Peulle. Nice but nothing that special. --Kreuzschnabel 14:36, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per the others. Also, for a FP of a scene like this, I would expect the rocks in the foreground to be sharp. --Domob (talk) 19:23, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Definitely a nice picture, but nothing so outstanding as to feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:53, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Peulle and Domob. --Basotxerri (talk) 16:18, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 04:27, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This is a nice dramatic shot and I wouldn't get discouraged by the number of opposes here, it's not too far away and is deservedly QI. It just doesn't have anything really special in light or composition. Cmao20 (talk) 17:12, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Amazon d'argile.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2019 at 11:48:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Korn Rade IMG 2491.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 18:12:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Grain Rade
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants # Family/Caryophyllaceae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Fischer.H - uploaded by Fischer.H - nominated by Fischer.H -- Fischer.H (talk) 18:12, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Fischer.H (talk) 18:12, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I'm not quite sure what to make of this picture. Very pleasing colours and nice composition, but somehow it does not "wow" me enough for a support. At least not yet. --Domob (talk) 19:29, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Good picture, but the bar for flower FPs is IMO very high, and this photo has a distracting background to my mind. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:54, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 03:25, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice colours, but a bit noisy, and the background is distracting for me. Cmao20 (talk) 17:09, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Eesti Üliõpilaste Seltsi maja, vapituba.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 15:01:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

360° view on the coat of arms room of the Estonian Students' Society
I'm not the photographer, Lauri Veerde is. I don't know what equipment does he use. Kruusamägi (talk) 17:52, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Technically outstanding. But I do not find the room itself very interesting. Especially the ceiling is rather boring. --Milseburg (talk) 18:04, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Per Milseburg. --Domob (talk) 19:24, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:24, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose per Milseburg. Good shot technically but I find it a little dull compared to many 360-degree panos we've seen here. Cmao20 (talk) 17:09, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kallerna. -- Karelj (talk) 20:10, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Artamus superciliosus male 2 - Bushells Lagoon.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 13:35:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

White-browed Woodswallow
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment one looks like a spider to me, the other perhaps nematocera. --Ivar (talk) 17:39, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Жовна зелена (Picus viridis).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 09:31:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Green woodpecker (Picus viridis). Chernivtsi, Ukraine.

File:Boiga nigriceps Red cat snake.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 07:20:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Kakadu (AU), Kakadu National Park, Yellow Water -- 2019 -- 3782.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 06:17:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ngurrungurrudjba (Yellow Water) in Kakadu National Park, Northern Territory, Australia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Australia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 06:17, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 06:17, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Deserves a feature for composition but there seems to be a general sharpness issue about your Australian images. This is so soft I have to downscale to 50 percent to get it crisp sharp – well, that’s still around 7 megapixels. Can anything be done about the overexposed trees on the left background? They somehow spoil it a bit. --Kreuzschnabel 07:34, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Just two answers: First, the trees. The tree trunks are very bright, nearly without a dark bark - like a lot of trees in Australia. It was early in the morning and the sunlight is on the trees too. So I can't see an overexposed trunk. Sorry. Second, the sharpness. Yes, the photo was made without tripod. Yes, it was made sitting on a small (and swaying) boat. So 1/125 s may be a little bit long. Looking at pixel level there may be a quantum of blur. I've seen this starting with a 30 mpx camera. It's the limit of what affordable lenses can do. And additionally I used other sharpness parameters with Adobe Lightroom. I can improve this sharpness, but IMO it's not really an issue. --XRay talk 09:35, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I find no fault with the sharpness. The nearby trees and reflections are sharp. The background is somewhat unsharp at full size but IMO fine. I wanted to give my input on that now, although I'm not yet ready to vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:26, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I'll improve sharpness and midtone brightness as soon as possible. I'll to do this until tomorrow. --XRay talk 12:20, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done The improvements are done ... --XRay talk 16:15, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Just nice, but not really an amazing picture in my view. Water reflection is very ordinary. The sky is a bit boring. I miss something extra -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:16, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - Would you consider offering a crop with just the clump of trees by the lake and their reflection? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:22, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Good question. I don't think so. IMO 2:1 is a good choice. The trees at the left give depth. --XRay talk 05:41, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • But my suggested alternative would create a tighter composition. Photographer's choice, though. I will consider what I have in front of me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:05, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Your ideas are always good. I'll try it and if it is good enough, I'll upload the extracted image. OK? --XRay talk 07:10, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • That's kind of you to say, but it's completely up to you. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:00, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Kakadu (AU), Kakadu National Park, Yellow Water -- 2019 -- 3782 (crop).jpg

  • And here it is, the crop Ikan Kekek proposed. Thank you! --XRay talk 14:42, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This is actually a better crop than I was thinking of. I find this composition harmonious. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:47, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Tempered support I still think the tree at left could be cropped out, but it doesn't bother me enough to oppose. Daniel Case (talk) 15:34, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Crop too tight at the left -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:01, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Ikan Kekek, Johann Jaritz, Daniel Case, Basile Morin: It's now square format. --XRay talk 06:02, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I'm inclined to still support, but I preferred your previous crop. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:26, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Sorry, I'm dissatisfied with the square format too. So I reverted it back to the former crop. But I'll upload (but not nominate) the square format too. --XRay talk 11:21, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support this version only; the other has too much empty space where nothing is going on. Cmao20 (talk) 17:06, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Bruderwald Birnen-Stäubling (Lycoperdon pyriforme)-RM-20191014-01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 22:03:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

pear-shaped puffball or stump puffball (Lycoperdon pyriforme).Focus stack of 16 images.

File:Reichtstag, Berlín, Alemania, 2016-04-21, DD 31-33 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 21:39:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Reichstag (Parliament), Berlin, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Night view of the Reichstag, a historic edifice in Berlin, Germany, constructed to house the Imperial Diet of the German Empire. It was opened in 1894 and housed the Diet until 1933, when it was severely damaged after being set on fire. After World War II, the building fell into disuse; the parliament of the German Democratic Republic met in the Palast der Republik in East Berlin, while the parliament of the Federal Republic of Germany (the Bundestag) met in the Bundeshaus in Bonn. The ruined building was restaurated after German reunification on 3 October 1990, when it underwent a reconstruction led by architect Norman Foster. After its completion in 1999, it once again became the meeting place of the German parliament: the modern Bundestag. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 21:39, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:39, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support a bit windy. Charles (talk) 23:10, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Some ghosts above the hedges in the bottom-right — Rhododendrites talk |  23:27, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
    Rhododendrites: I removed those HDR artifacts, --Poco a poco (talk) 20:50, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 23:29, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:57, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Strong sky noise, f/5 could be more acurrate and faster to get a sharp image, a bit small if you see the camera used. Everything fixable --Wilfredor (talk) 02:33, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
    Wilfredor: I've reduced the noise. The f/11 is the optimal setting for the lens I used. Poco a poco (talk) 20:50, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Domob (talk) 09:39, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 13:39, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- while the quality is acceptable in most parts of the image, some parts appear to have too strong noise reduction, causing some elements to blend into the sky. For example, the two objects on either side of the dome. Also, I find the dynamic range insufficient for dark parts of the scene (despite HDR having been used). For comparison, File:Reichstag zur blauen Stunde, Berlin-Mitte, 1705312210, ako.jpg has much better details in the shadows as it was taken at blue hour, and it is also generally sharper thanks to the superior lens used. However, I do appreciate the longer focal length used in this photo, allowing the dome to be much more prominent. dllu (t,c) 07:52, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per dllu, this not finest on Commons. --Ivar (talk) 12:09, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per dllu. Other picture is far superior in sharpness, details, lighting and timing (blue hour prevents the foreground grass from disappearing into black, and creates better background for the building. -- Colin (talk) 12:42, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin; also, there's this sort of halo around the building that makes some of the more distant details of the rear roof look more drawn than photographed. Daniel Case (talk) 02:01, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per dllu. I would have supported if dllu hadn't linked to the other shot, but that one is unfortunately definitely superior, and so I don't think this is really the best on Commons. Cmao20 (talk) 17:04, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Catedral de Salzburgo, Salzburgo, Austria, 2019-05-19, DD 27-29 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 19:30:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dome of Salzburg Cathedral, Austria.

File:Rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta mulatta), male, Gokarna.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 18:08:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta mulatta), male in Nepal
  • I guess. He was sitting on his own. Charles (talk) 23:06, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Certainly a nice picture, but it doesn't look very special to me. Also it is quite soft, at least compared to some of your other spectacular wildlife shots. --Domob (talk) 05:42, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 23:19, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per Domob -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:16, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nice one.--Nirmal Dulal (talk) 04:34, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 15:45, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Maybe it could do with a tad more sharpening, but it's great considering the size. I'd rather slightly soft than oversharpened any day, at least too little sharpening can easily be fixed. Cmao20 (talk) 17:03, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:55, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Helmmycena (Mycena galericulata) (d.j.b.) 06.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 16:13:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Cirque de Navacelles (3).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 15:02:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cirque de Navacelles in the Massif Central, South of France
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/France
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 15:02, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 15:02, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love the composition with the road :) I think it’d work even better with the building on the left cropped out, so the cliffs on the left and right look symmetric. --Kreuzschnabel 15:21, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose The composition is indeed very nice (although I agree with Kreuzschnabel that the building should perhaps be removed completely), but I find the picture (especially some parts of it, e.g. in the right -- maybe a bad frame?) too soft. --Domob (talk) 16:52, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - To me, none of it is that sharp for a panorama. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:28, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 18:47, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think this image shows an issue which I sometimes have with your (very good) work, that it doesn't seem to have a whole lot of contrast. It looks a bit like what would happen if you pulled the shadows up and the highlights back, so that the image has a lot of midtones but no real light/dark areas. I also think it's a bit less sharp than your usual and could maybe do with less NR. I do like the composition though. Cmao20 (talk) 19:13, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I've been there and tried to make a panoramic myself, but I found it quite difficult. So I think this one passes the test with pretty good marks. MartinD (talk) 12:43, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Maison Carree in Nimes (9).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 14:57:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Maison Carrée in Nîmes, Gard, France
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects#Other architectural elements
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 14:57, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This image was awarded the 7th prize in the national contest of France in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019. Tournasol7 (talk) 14:58, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 14:57, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose It's a nice picture, but for me the very tight bottom crop doesn't work well (it looks incomplete). --Domob (talk) 16:50, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow --Michielverbeek (talk) 23:31, 9 December 2019 (UC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't find this special enough -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:52, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Basile.--Peulle (talk) 07:33, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Maybe this motif could produce an FP with the right crop, but I don't think this is it. However, it might be a good VI, depending on its competition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:30, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 05:10, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The crop doesn't work for me, with the cut-off bit on the right hand side. Good quality image though and I second Ikan's comments that it may well be VI. Cmao20 (talk) 18:55, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Gliophorus chromolimoneus - Ferndale Park.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 13:41:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gliophorus chromolimoneus

File:ODEEP ONE (ship, 1986), Sète.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 20:20:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

ODEEP ONE (ship, 1986)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment the stars are caused by diffraction, not dispersion. But I agree, not sure why f/16 was used. dllu (t,c) 07:54, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 08:13, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I wasn't wowed at the first sight but after a few seconds of looking at the picture I did get wowed :) --Podzemnik (talk) 19:49, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Reflection of lights, well, but the main subject is unclear. Ship hidden in the darkness. Overall not special enough. Quality image but no wow -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:47, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 13:42, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Domob. Daniel Case (talk) 00:11, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I disagree with all the opposing arguments above and would like to support, but would you consider cropping a little closer on the left to avoid having so many stray rays there? Or failing that, would it look good to crop further to the left and include that light source, if possible? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:47, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Podzemnik. Cmao20 (talk) 18:50, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:06, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:2018 01 (Blue) - Chaouen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 17:58:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Fbrandao.1963 - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 17:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 17:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportRhododendrites talk |  18:30, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Liking this - really interesting architecture. Cmao20 (talk) 18:59, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Two angels on my shoulder with this image - one wants to take away the doorstep carpet on the right to emphasize the blue theme; the other likes the carpet for the contrast it brings. Both agree that the image would benefit if the blip in the top right (marked with note) were cropped out. --GRDN711 (talk) 20:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question How do we know if the white balance is set correctly in an image like this? -- King of ♠ 01:05, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • How do you know the white balance is correct in a golden hour or sunset photo? Light is always subjective to the mood in the photo. Anyway, there are white details (albeight a bit yellowed with age) in both light and shadow in this photo (electrical wire and landline phone detalis) and things seems to be very "accurate" in this case. --Cart (talk) 09:26, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
King of In the image metadata show "White balance: Auto white balance". From my point of view, the camera found everything very golden or yellow due to the golden moment and I try to correct it by adding too much blue to the image. Cart, relativist fallacy is useful for anything, which means that it does not serve to explain anything in specific. --Wilfredor (talk) 14:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Not really sure where you are going with that comment. I mentioned the white objects since they can be used to check the WB. Seeing "white balance: Auto white balance" in the meta doesn't mean anything since it can be altered in post editing. Btw, check out the other photos in the category, Flickr and the article Chefchaouen about these blue houses. There seems to be a global conspiracy about wrong WB for these houses, or else they really are very blue. ;-) --Cart (talk) 14:32, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Cart you've convinced me --Wilfredor (talk) 15:23, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 21:53, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I've no idea if the blue is natural, but, yes or no, it doesn't appeal. Charles (talk) 23:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Whites look yellowish to me -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:43, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Moderate support; would be fuller support if cropped as suggested. Daniel Case (talk) 19:00, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - FWIW, I might support the suggested crop. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:48, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Charles. The scene is nice, but the blue certainly bothers me a lot. --Domob (talk) 05:40, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I'm confused. Chefchaouen is known as the "Blue City". Does it bother you that you're looking at blue, or are you unconvinced the blue is real? I guess if you don't like looking at this much blue, it's a matter of taste, but if you look through Category:Chefchaouen, you sure will see a lot of blue. It's real, alright. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:10, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It doesn't look real to me on the picture, but I well believe you it may be true. However, even in that case, the blue tone doesn't appeal to me, so that this may be a VI or QI but not FP (for my taste). --Domob (talk) 17:49, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Châteaux du Pays cathare - Château de Quéribus - 04.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 11:43:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the housing of the governor of the Château de Quéribus (Cucugnan, Département Aude, France) on the Canigou (2785m).
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 11:43, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 11:43, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yes, funny idea, but image quality on the landscape is mediocre, and the flashlit masonry taking up 75 percent of the frame doesn’t look really nice. --Kreuzschnabel 12:12, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the idea is very good and the implementation successful --Milseburg (talk) 14:38, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Executed pretty well, I think. The resolution is sufficient that the frame-in-a-frame doesn't suffer too much. — Rhododendrites talk |  18:16, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not perfect quality but overall a good idea well done. Cmao20 (talk) 18:59, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:11, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice idea, and to me the quality of the landscape is certainly good enough. --Domob (talk) 05:50, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, it's a nice idea but I don't get wowed neither by the landscape or by the wall. The wall seems to be a bit overcooked (direct flash I guess?) and the landscape doesn't have a straight point too look at. I wish there was a more distinctive feature like here. --Podzemnik (talk) 19:54, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel and Podzemnik. — Draceane talkcontrib. 21:19, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Podzemnik Poco a poco (talk) 21:48, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question a tighter crop? see note. Charles (talk) 23:14, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Châteaux du Pays cathare - Château de Quéribus - 04a.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Crop as suggested by Charles --Llez (talk) 05:52, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This composition really works for me. Sharpness is not optimal, etc., but it's good enough for me to support a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:44, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Much better, but the harsh flashlight on the inside wall at almost the same brightness as the sunlit parts still doesn’t appeal to me. Just looks unreal, can’t be "true", there’s two competing light sources here that won’t mix. Flashlight reduced to ⅛ or even less (plus softener) might have worked. --Kreuzschnabel 07:11, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I think I could support this if something were done to dim the flash on the wall. Daniel Case (talk) 18:55, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Flash dimmed as proposed --Llez (talk) 19:11, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support either — Rhododendrites talk |  19:19, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support much better Charles (talk) 16:37, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Fin Garden Kushak.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 07:26:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fin Garden Kushak in kashan.jpg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Amirpashaei - uploaded by Amirpashaei - nominated by Amirpashaei -- Amirpashaei (talk) 07:26, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Amirpashaei (talk) 07:26, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Domob (talk) 08:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment strange artefacts on the water, how is this photo taken? No metadata either. --Ivar (talk) 14:15, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @Iifar: thanks. you're right. I adjusted artifacts problem. this is an HDR panorama picture with 24mm tilt shift lens--Amirpashaei (talk) 16:11, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment the composition is very good and the subject interesting, so it works well as a thumbnail, but there are technical issues at full size. There's chromatic aberration (a bit in the water, a lot in the trees) and some artifacts on the people in the background. The interior quality is good for FP IMO, nice high resolution, but the outside light is really harsh and has lost some detail. — Rhododendrites talk |  18:27, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @Rhododendrites: thanks. you're right . I fixed chromatic aberration. and I fixed artifacts on the people too.--Amirpashaei (talk) 19:30, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Gnosis (talk) 18:28, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:10, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Ultimately too soft and the trees outside a little overexposed. It seems like there was a long exposure, which might better explain this, but in the absence of metadata we can't know.GA candidate.svg Weak support now Daniel Case (talk) 04:22, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose per Daniel. I also feel like the colors outside the structure are a little off. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:04, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @Ikan Kekek: , **@Daniel Case:, thanks for your useful critiques. I improved the light in exterior section. say to me if another improvement needed. I took this picture with 5 frame with tilt shift lens and every frame contain 5 pictures with difference of levels of exposure. (HDR panorama). 6D canon. 24 mm tilt shift lens. iso 100. f:14 exposure time (1/30 , 1/15 , 1/8 , 1/4, 1/2 ). --Amirpashaei (talk) 09:06, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - That looks much better. Do you think it's a true representation of what you saw? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Well then it has my approval. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:21, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support thanks for the fixes. — Rhododendrites talk |  18:44, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Amirpashaei, I think your category is too general. You should add "#Iran" at the end. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:13, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • And in your other nominee? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:52, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • sure. I will add to them too--Amirpashaei (talk) 06:30, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

File:A tourist lady in Jameh Mosque of Isfahan.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 07:17:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A tourist lady in Jameh Mosque of Isfahan
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Amirpashaei - uploaded by Amirpashaei - nominated by Amirpashaei -- Amirpashaei (talk) 07:17, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Amirpashaei (talk) 07:17, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose blurry lady doesn't work for me, sorry. --Ivar (talk) 14:17, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @Iifar: blurry person in architectural photography for show scales not problem--Amirpashaei (talk) 14:54, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The more I think about it, the blurry person doesn't actually bother me. It is indeed good for showing the scale. Cmao20 (talk) 18:53, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Cmao20. --Pugilist (talk) 22:02, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice compo, but the blurry lady plus the blown areas at her feet and at the windows, chromatic aberration on the brickwork. Difficult scene that might require at least three combined shots (lady, overall, windows) to make it really good. --Cart (talk) 11:46, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support If I pixel-peep, she's blurry. At full screen she's fine and like a painting all primary colours (yellow, red, blue). She's standing exactly in the spots of light from the window, and framed by the arch in the rear wall. And the brickwork with spirals and diagonals is well described with light cement contrasting. Yes I wish the glare from the window was handled better, but it can be really hard when you point your lens straight at a bright window. I do hope she isn't photoshopped in. Could you save your JPG with some EXIF data and an embedded colourspace please. -- Colin (talk) 12:55, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Regretfully I agree with Cart... Tournasol7 (talk) 15:07, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @W.carter:, @Colin:, @Tournasol7:, @Iifar:, you're right. thanks for your nice critiques. I improved the light. I fixed chromatic aberration and I improved blurry lady. I think because the picture merged from 3 shots(HDR)photoshop cant save file with EXIF.--Amirpashaei (talk) 17:00, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks, that's better, move to Symbol support vote.svg Support. For the exif, you can take one of the photos and add this as a top layer to it and merge into one. I know it will not cover all three shots, but it will be close enough and better that no exif. --Cart (talk) 17:18, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm not so worried about the EXIF data for camera lens, exposure, etc (though it is nice to add that detail for a complex shot to the description). You may have lost the colour profile when doing the HDR so may have to assign one again (e.g. sRGB) and don't use Photoshop's 'save for web' but instead use the save option that preserves exif. That way the image has a colour profile and we all see the same colours. Btw, it is a shame the lady's primary colours are not so vivid in the new version. Perhaps that is realistic, though -- you can judge from your individual exposures. What are you using for HDR? --Colin (talk) 17:48, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • @W.carter: thanks again Mr carter . The way you said it didn't work. the photo taken with 24mm tilt shift lens. 6D canon. f:14 , iso 100, exposure time (2,4,8) seconds.--Amirpashaei (talk) 17:40, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Too bad, it usually works for me. I've added the Template:Photo Information to the file, you can use that instead. I've filled in some of what you wrote here, but please correct if I got something wrong and feel free to fill in the rest. Also, I'm a "Miss" not a "Mr". :-) --Cart (talk) 17:54, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • excuse me Miss carter for my mistake. thanks for your useful information and your kindness.--Amirpashaei (talk) 18:01, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Better now but still has a lot of CA. Daniel Case (talk) 20:23, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ivar Poco a poco (talk) 21:46, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @Poco a poco: I fixed chromatic aberration, blurry lady and artifact. is this another problem Mr Silva?--Amirpashaei (talk) 12:00, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Many improvements since the original nomination. OK for me. --GRDN711 (talk) 20:12, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noting special. -- Karelj (talk) 21:17, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:04, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Corsica-geographic map-fr.svg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Dec 2019 at 21:16:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vector map of Corsica in French
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Maps
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by ikonact - uploaded by ikonact - nominated by Ikonact -- Ikonact (talk) 21:16, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikonact (talk) 21:16, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I don't have the expertise about Corsica that I have about New York State or some other areas, but this looks fairly comprehensive, and it's definitely elegant and clear. I do see a few rivers (rivières en français) that look long enough for names to be added, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:38, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: Thanks. I am glad that I managed to achieve the state of comprehensive maps thanks to yours and other comments in the previous nomination :) I will add missing names on rivers. --Ikonact (talk) 10:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question You have made many maps that are generally automatically generated by computer. What makes this map special?. --Wilfredor (talk) 00:42, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
@Wilfredor: you are right, the maps are generated by computer but it is far from "automatic". I coded the software to generate the maps, I gathered and processed various data sources and spent hours to finalise the map and put the names and symbols in place. But what makes this map special? Nothing really. I liked this one out of all those I created because it looks nice and has a lot of details.--Ikonact (talk) 20:56, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
@Kreuzschnabel: This map is not really like all maps in Category:Topographic_maps. This map is fully vector and respects Wikipedia map conventions. There are few maps like this. --Ikonact (talk) 20:56, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
Kreuzschnabel, further to Ikonact's response: There is a great variety of maps in that category. Many are not featurable on account of size or lack of detail. Which others do you think we'd be obligated to feature if we feature this one? And to all the opposers: What do you find lacking in this map that makes it not excellent? As a long-time geography buff who used to collect the best atlases I could find, I appreciate this as an excellent map of its subject, the entire island of Corsica. It's certainly possible to have more detail: I've seen maps that show every house and had maps like that in the 1970s. But choices have to be made about the scale you will use and the level of detail that can be reasonably and clearly covered at that scale. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:12, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not an excellent picture for me --Fischer.H (talk) 17:09, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 16:54, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. The maps physical layers of topography, barymetry and shades are vectorial, which is by itself a feast. The map follows wikipedia maps conventions (best practices) : our topographic maps convention, exchange-road maps conventions, map icons toolbox. Human layers are properly fetched from OSM or other sources, while time consuming hand-made corrections have very likely been done to avoid labels collisions. Legend is properly done, coordinates and North are defined via the grid system which is the most accurate approach. The whole file is made of well organized 22 vector layers, easy to reuse in and outside Wikipedia, and easy to translate. The file size could be reduced via path simplifications, but with 13MB, we are at a very acceptable and workable file size. The whole map (end result) and technique used (process) is a feast. Cheer up to Ikonact, we need more maps of such quality. Yug (talk) 22:11, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Bathymetry contours (and probably even rivers, but not so clearly visible, I think only bathymetry is problematic) are made by polygonal chain, not by spline (they are natural features, they dont have straight line segments divided by angles, so they need to be represented in other way). Some labelling placed wrongly (for example Linguizetta, Grosseto, Sarténe) and generally, labeling could be better readable if it would have some character framing. Symbol for mountain pass seems to me too long and it is placed little bit wrongly in some cases (Col de Verde, Col de Vizzavona). All of these are fixable I hope and otherwise it could be featured picture in my perspective. --Grtek (talk) 15:30, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
@Grtek: Thanks for the comments. I tried to address them in a new version of the map. --Ikonact (talk) 23:17, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - That's a clear improvement. I still think there's room for a few more rivers to be labeled. One small detail: Col. de Vergio is not clearly labeled now, because the red road overlaps one side of the now-smaller mountain pass symbol. I'm not sure what you should do about that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:23, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Better now. But I still think that some character framing in labels could be improvement. And you changed col symbol in map but not in legend. And I would move legend frame little bit up, so space from bottom and right map edge would be the same. And move hypsometry legend little bit left so left edge of scale frame would "continue" as left edge of hypsometry legend. And then (maybe) move hypsometry legend little bit up so space between left map edge and scale frame would be the same. And last thing that I see now – unit label in scale is usually placed after highest number in scale. So after number 20, not between numbers. But yours non-standard solution doesnt bother me so much.--Grtek (talk) 09:31, 12 December 2019 (UTC) Supplemented --Grtek (talk) 09:57, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
@Grtek:, @Ikan Kekek: I uploaded a new version. Hope this answers your remarks. Thanks--Ikonact (talk) 23:12, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the further improvements. I wish more people would support, but you've certainly made the map more valuable. It should definitely be nominated at VIC. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:57, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support, you did really great job. --Grtek (talk) 08:25, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:L.A. Ring, Snebillede. Sankt Jørgensbjerg, 1915. Privateje. Særudstillingen 'Kunstnerbrødre. L.A. Ring & H.A.Brendekilde' Nivaagaards Malerisamling 22.9.19-26.1.20.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 Dec 2019 at 19:37:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

painting from 1915 by L.A. Ring
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - OK, but I certainly believe that the lack of an interesting composition is a valid reason to oppose a feature for a picture of a painting, or to simply not vote to support it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:27, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no reason for me to FP nomination --Fischer.H (talk) 17:19, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A painting should not become FP just because it is a painting by a notable artist. I don't see anything remarkable about it that would warrant a feature. -- King of ♠ 21:47, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support on the grounds that it is a well-done photo of a painting. We're not !voting on the painting itself. Daniel Case (talk) 01:27, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This painting is well-photographed and certainly would be QI. For FP, the whole visual effect has to say "wow" to me and unfortunately, it does not. Sorry. --GRDN711 (talk) 02:18, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The painting is lovely, it's working for me. The resolution is good too. --Podzemnik (talk) 19:56, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seven Pandas (talk) 02:28, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:02, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Istenberg mit Bruchhauser Steinen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2019 at 18:22:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rocks "Bruchhauser Steine" in the Sauerland
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per King of Hearts. It is a nice and pleasing shot, but nothing very special. --Domob (talk) 06:19, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, plus most parts of the rocks being in the shadow. To me, this is just the standard walker’s view of them :) The leftmost one is the Bornstein. --Kreuzschnabel 08:38, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others; just a typical autumn landscape. Daniel Case (talk) 06:25, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Pretty and good quality but IMO not an outstanding composition. Cmao20 (talk) 18:44, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Lake Clearwater, Canterbury, New Zealand 15.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2019 at 08:06:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lake Clearwater, Canterbury, New Zealand
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/New_Zealand#Canterbury_(Waitaha)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. It's Lake Clearwater in Canterbury, New Zealand. We already have this FP of the lake but I think this panorama is distinctive enough. -- Podzemnik (talk) 08:06, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Podzemnik (talk) 08:06, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Domob (talk) 12:15, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dinkum (talk) 12:32, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 12:43, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 13:04, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I want to get a canoe or kayak and paddle across that lake now, except that it looks cold. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:25, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I hope you are getting checks from the New Zealand tourism board... — Rhododendrites talk |  20:44, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 22:34, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 00:33, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Not the most successful composition in my view. Uninteresting bush in the center, aligned with the mountain. Cut lake. Lacks dynamism. However, I'm more on the support side, because the scenery is great -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:16, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:09, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Feel similar to Basil. The right two thirds isn't as strong as the left third, with the central bush and wedge of lake on the right. I'll suggest a crop which has imo much better composition and leading lines (which are interrupted by the bush in this one). -- Colin (talk) 18:08, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
  • @Colin Thanks for the review, you'll be right. I've provided an alternative. --Podzemnik (talk) 08:18, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The left is leaning down, it needs a perspective correction Poco a poco (talk) 17:45, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @Poco a poco I gave it a play, I think it's fixed now. --Podzemnik (talk) 08:49, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
      • It looks indeed better, but you stopped kind of halway --Poco a poco (talk) 10:09, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMeiræ 22:52, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support I have no problems with the composition, really, but what looks like polarization has left the lake and bush looking slightly unnaturally darkened. Daniel Case (talk) 02:26, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 08:28, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 21:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:09, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Alternative, another version[edit]

Lake Clearwater, Canterbury, New Zealand 15 - cropped.jpg

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Doesn't work for me. I love the great lateral/diagonal expanse in the other version. My eye doesn't move nearly as well around this picture frame. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:02, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like that it neatly brackets the distant mountain range, and that the path, the coast, and the wind-streaks on the water form leading lines. -- Colin (talk) 10:25, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A very good, painterly composition. I'm not sure I like the panorama as much as the crop on the right seems somewhat arbitrary and aimless. Cmao20 (talk) 18:42, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose With the cut bush, a part seems missing at the right. Just a nice image, but not really spectacular in my view, and in any case inferior to the one above. Actually I quite like the first version (will move to weak support if necessary), especially the highest mountains. The problem is the bush. I think you could have arranged the composition within the frame better, for example by putting this bush more to the right, and your camera higher with you climbing to the left, to get a better balance and a more satisfying harmony of the several elements composing the image -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:29, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:09, 12 December 2019 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: X support, X oppose, X neutral → not featured. /Note: this candidate has several alternatives, thus if featured the alternative parameter needs to be specified. /FPCBot (talk) 13:03, 14 December 2019 (UTC))

File:Hermite Crab Dry Tortugas.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2019 at 06:21:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Caribbean hermit crab (coenobita clypeatus) in the Dry Tortugas
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I personally find the simple composition with just the leaves (which I wouldn't expect as background for a hermit crab), the white shell and the red body quite nice, but that's of course just a matter of taste. And I have to admit that I'm not very experienced with either wildlife or closeup photography. --Domob (talk) 05:55, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Daniel Case --Fischer.H (talk) 17:52, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A leaf is a good background for a land-dwelling crab. --Llez (talk) 08:25, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - How big was this hermit crab? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:47, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Maybe about 10cm including the shell and excluding the antennas (as in the picture). Certainly not a real "macro" shot (if that is what you are interested in). --Domob (talk) 09:54, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Thank you. BA candidate.svg Weak oppose - I didn't really think this was a small hermit crab, but I thought I'd check. Looking at it at about life size (120% of full screen on my 13-inch laptop), it's not outstandingly sharp, so my feeling is that this is a good photo (and I think the composition is fine) but not a really outstanding one, considering the kinds of wildlife photos we feature, nowadays. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:30, 10 December 2019 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:03, 14 December 2019 (UTC)



Contestations en cours[edit]

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Darwin (AU), Stokes Hill Wharf -- 2019 -- 4362.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2019 at 06:35:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stokes Hill Wharf in Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Australia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 06:35, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Just an information: The objects in the front are in the sun, the background is dark because of the rain clouds. Wonderful light conditions. --XRay talk 09:56, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 06:35, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:43, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Perfect light, perfect sky, perfect colours. I really like this a lot. --Basotxerri (talk) 09:36, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBijay chaurasia (talk) 11:23, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Adenium obesum.jpeg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2019 at 01:14:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Adenium obesum

File:Nuluujaak Mountain.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2019 at 01:07:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nuluujaak Mountain

File:Morning at Tham Sakoen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Dec 2019 at 18:05:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Morning at Tham Sakoen
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural#Thailand
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A spectacular image of natural beauty, and one which did well in Wiki Loves Earth 2019. created by Jane3030 - uploaded by Jane3030 - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 18:05, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 18:05, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 19:59, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice atmosphere. Charles (talk) 20:13, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Karelj (talk) 20:40, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Please remove the dust spots --Wilfredor (talk) 20:42, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Yes to what Wilfredor said above. I will vote for this when the spots are removed, but if they aren't removed, I would sadly have to oppose. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:45, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree. Charles (talk) 22:27, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm not 100% certain I have solved this problem as when I viewed it at full size I'm afraid I couldn't see huge numbers of dust spots. I saw a few darker smudges caused by dirt on the lens, but not a massive number of obvious spots. That said I think the problem is sorted, so @Ikan Kekek:, @Charlesjsharp:, @Wilfredor:, could you take a look and see whether it is any better? If not, I would appreciate a more specific note about where you can still see dust spots. Cmao20 (talk) 23:15, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • It looks to me like you got most of them, but I still see a big one where I just marked it. Have a look. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:18, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • It took me three minutes, but I've finally found something that could be (maybe? maybe not) a very tiny dust spot (almost invisible). Good luck, Cmao20 :-) Almost all paintings in every museum also contain some very small bristles of the brush, lost and mixed with the painting. Some even say these bristles belong to the beard of the famous masters. When I was young, it was a challenge to chase them, by sticking my eyes very close to the canvas, but I'm not sure the guards would have let me remove them Face-grin.svg -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:23, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Mediaeval Screenwork, North, Church of St Peter and St Paul, East Harling.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Dec 2019 at 18:03:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mediaeval screenwork, Church of St Peter and St Paul
  • I certainly haven't nominated anything like this lately, but we may have had something of the kind, I honestly don't recall. If anyone can find a similar nom please link to it, but I don't see any other FPs of this subject from my own search. Cmao20 (talk) 22:57, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Certainly good quality and deservedly QI but I can’t see anything wowy here. --Kreuzschnabel 23:11, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Kreuzschnabel. --GRDN711 (talk) 23:40, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Steam engine in Karchowice (Karchowitz).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2019 at 20:52:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Steam engine in Karchowice (Karchowitz), Upper Silesia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 20:52, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 20:52, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very dark, haze in the background, nothing distinguishable -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:13, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Basile. Nice mood but all I see is a noisy image of cut-off machinery in hazy conditions and poor contrast. Verticals are irritatingly leaning out (at least the lamp chain should be perpendicular). I can’t see any excellent photographic work here. Sorry. --Kreuzschnabel 09:28, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes, whatever the outcome, I think the lamp chain should be vertical. Unless it is intended to oscillate like a pendulum :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:41, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support I like the mood very much but the haziness of everything is a bit distracting. Cmao20 (talk) 17:21, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Nice mood, but overall the picture is not FP for me (per the others). --Domob (talk) 17:41, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. --GRDN711 (talk) 23:42, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Bergtocht van Prasüras,door het Val Trupchun naar Alp Purcher 18-09-2019. (d.j.b) 18.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2019 at 16:27:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Old hut/Switzerland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Maybe too simple for FP. But the building blends in beautifully with the landscape. With the sturdy picnic table in front.
    All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:27, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:27, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sharp photo, but not really interesting, no wow for me --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:13, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice. -- -donald- (talk) 07:31, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Surely nice but not excellent IMHO. The sunlit wall looks overexposed, at least washed out, and I’d prefer to see what the shadow on the right comes from. Also, I’d prefer less space on the left and more on the right to support the direction the house "looks" into. --Kreuzschnabel 09:32, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yeah it looks all right, but nothing really extraordinary.--Peulle (talk) 13:33, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per nomination. Cmao20 (talk) 17:20, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Nice scene, but not special enough for FP for me. (Especially the flat grass in the front seems a bit boring to me.) --Domob (talk) 17:42, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not special enough, just a good QI -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:13, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Bergtocht van Prasüras,door het Val Trupchun naar Alp Purcher 18-09-2019. (d.j.b) 18 Alt.jpg

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Famberhorst (talk) 18:00, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not special enough, just a good QI -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:13, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Basile Morin. --GRDN711 (talk) 23:44, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Passerelle Debilly, Paris 5 November 2019.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2019 at 12:38:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Passerelle Debilly, Paris, France.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ali Sabbagh (Flickr) - uploaded and nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 12:38, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 12:38, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The bridge is nice but the image doesn't seem very outstanding for me. IMO if you include that much sky, it should be interesting enough. Please remove the CAs. --Basotxerri (talk) 16:15, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Baso (and nice to see you, man; it feels like it's been a while). Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:18, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with the above. I also find the image quality a little mediocre with some CA visible in the water. Good image overall, but not FP for me. Cmao20 (talk) 17:19, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per the others. Quite good (although not outstanding) quality and an interesting bridge, but not special enough for FP. --Domob (talk) 17:43, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others; also noticeable CA near sides. Might have worked, at least better, in direct sunlight. Daniel Case (talk) 19:12, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Jaguar Mark V drophead coupé - Charleroi 2019 - 08.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2019 at 11:33:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Leaper of a 3½ litre Jaguar Mark V drophead coupé.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Automobiles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jmh2o - uploaded by Jmh2o - nominated by Jmh2o -- H2O(talk) 11:33, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- H2O(talk) 11:33, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 13:47, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I love it, and it's an unusual, creative composition, a really good way to depict this hood ornament. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:20, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice subject but distracting background. The head of the jaguar looks like a hook -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:09, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose per Basile – the unlucky background spoils it in my eyes too. Pity, otherwise I’d really support it. Any more shots of this fine motif from a slightly different angle? --Kreuzschnabel 09:35, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. Cmao20 (talk) 17:18, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support The background is indeed not ideal, but I'd still support the picture as it is. --Domob (talk) 17:44, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support All the background lines do, for me, is accentuate those in the foreground. Daniel Case (talk) 19:06, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Basile Poco a poco (talk) 11:47, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Untere Stuhllochscharte.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2019 at 15:46:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Untere Stuhllochscharte winter view
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Grtek - uploaded by Grtek - nominated by Grtek -- Grtek (talk) 15:46, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Grtek (talk) 15:46, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Basotxerri (talk) 17:06, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 18:55, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Domob (talk) 19:22, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unusual. But I can not take any information from this image, which is really inspiring me or help me to learn anything about this gap. Nothing special about the Gosaukamm. Interchangeable. It could be anywhere in the high mountains. --Milseburg (talk) 20:36, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like this because I really feel the cold and desolation. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:45, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Seven Pandas (talk) 23:33, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice candidate for BW conversion. -- King of ♠ 02:08, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:29, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:02, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Bijay chaurasia (talk) 09:59, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Milsebug + I do not support BW-images in repositories like Commons. —kallerna (talk) 13:27, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Sorry to say, but if more people felt like you, FPC would be even deader - from an artistic / truly photographic point of view - than it already is (I've always wanted to use this comparative Face-wink.svg ). We're rapidly turning into a sterile, formalistic, pixel peeping tech forum that doesn't really care about unique perspectives - literally and figuratively - or bold approaches. Just my two cents. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:54, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Yep, truer words have seldom been spoken here! --Cart (talk) 09:48, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • On the other side: I think lately too little attention has been paid to whether the candidates have an outstanding benefit in the encyclopedic projects. Sober, factual presentations have a harder time compared to images whose artistic aspect repress the factual. --Milseburg (talk) 14:53, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • True, Commons serves a media repository for wikis of all kinds and scopes. But there is certainly no lack of straightforward, high quality depictions of the factual world (cityscapes, nature, animals...). Yet Commons could and should be so, so much more...! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:17, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ermell (talk) 20:07, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the way the little motes of snow dance in the sun ... something that you can only see when pixel-peeping, and something the black and white makes better.Face-wink.svg Daniel Case (talk) 15:49, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 15:55, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. Commons should encompass all kinds of quality material, not just what is suitable for an encyclopedia. This is a high quality shot that illustrates good use of B&W very well. Cmao20 (talk) 17:15, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Indeed, but we also don't know which good photos may serve an encyclopedia well. There have been hilarious cases of photos that had a hard time as unsuitable for an encyclopedia that ended up illustrating Wikipedia articles very well. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:48, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Sydney (AU), Opera House -- 2019 -- 3049.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2019 at 14:58:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Roof of the Opera House, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Australia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 14:58, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 14:58, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting view, but for me this composition does not really work. I would like to have "something more". Sorry. --Domob (talk) 19:25, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I just have to say, this looks like a worm's-eye view of the world's largest bustier. Daniel Case (talk) 02:05, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Domob.--Peulle (talk) 08:03, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Domob. Daniel Case (talk) 15:42, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I see what you were going for and I like to see abstract stuff like this at FPC, but this one doesn't work for me. The various crops just look a bit awkward, and I've seen better studies of shapes, lines and colours than this. Cmao20 (talk) 17:14, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination I think it is better to withdraw. --XRay talk 17:23, 13 December 2019 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--XRay talk 17:27, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Spb StMichael Castle asv2019-09 img11.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2019 at 13:20:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Oval Hall of St. Michael's Castle
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Russia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Oval Hall of Saint Michael's Castle, Saint Petersburg. All by A.Savin --A.Savin 13:20, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 13:20, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Pretty, well-composed, excellent light management. A few places might be slightly sharper, such as the ceiling decorations that are partly covered by the "candlelights", but overall, I think this is quite clearly an FP by 2019 standards. Is there something I'm missing that's causing anyone to hesitate to support? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:51, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great, excellent -- Je-str (talk) 09:50, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:17, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Basotxerri (talk) 16:17, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 20:10, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolf im Wald 03:43, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:28, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The very tight cut on the lettering at the top left is disadvantageous --Milseburg (talk) 15:44, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 15:54, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support Could be sharper in some places, but overall interesting enough for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 17:12, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:01, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Quality is good but the hall is not really wowing to me Poco a poco (talk) 11:55, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

File:The coast of Crete Sea near Chania. Crete, Greece.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2019 at 12:13:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The coast of Crete Sea near Chania. Crete, Greece
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ввласенко - uploaded by Ввласенко - nominated by Ввласенко -- Ввласенко (talk) 12:13, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice, I suppose, but I'm not seeing any big wow factor here.--Peulle (talk) 13:39, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Peulle. Nice but nothing that special. --Kreuzschnabel 14:36, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per the others. Also, for a FP of a scene like this, I would expect the rocks in the foreground to be sharp. --Domob (talk) 19:23, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Definitely a nice picture, but nothing so outstanding as to feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:53, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Peulle and Domob. --Basotxerri (talk) 16:18, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 04:27, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This is a nice dramatic shot and I wouldn't get discouraged by the number of opposes here, it's not too far away and is deservedly QI. It just doesn't have anything really special in light or composition. Cmao20 (talk) 17:12, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Amazon d'argile.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2019 at 11:48:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Korn Rade IMG 2491.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 18:12:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Grain Rade
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants # Family/Caryophyllaceae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Fischer.H - uploaded by Fischer.H - nominated by Fischer.H -- Fischer.H (talk) 18:12, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Fischer.H (talk) 18:12, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I'm not quite sure what to make of this picture. Very pleasing colours and nice composition, but somehow it does not "wow" me enough for a support. At least not yet. --Domob (talk) 19:29, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Good picture, but the bar for flower FPs is IMO very high, and this photo has a distracting background to my mind. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:54, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 03:25, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice colours, but a bit noisy, and the background is distracting for me. Cmao20 (talk) 17:09, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Eesti Üliõpilaste Seltsi maja, vapituba.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 15:01:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

360° view on the coat of arms room of the Estonian Students' Society
I'm not the photographer, Lauri Veerde is. I don't know what equipment does he use. Kruusamägi (talk) 17:52, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Technically outstanding. But I do not find the room itself very interesting. Especially the ceiling is rather boring. --Milseburg (talk) 18:04, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Per Milseburg. --Domob (talk) 19:24, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:24, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose per Milseburg. Good shot technically but I find it a little dull compared to many 360-degree panos we've seen here. Cmao20 (talk) 17:09, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kallerna. -- Karelj (talk) 20:10, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Artamus superciliosus male 2 - Bushells Lagoon.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 13:35:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

White-browed Woodswallow
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment one looks like a spider to me, the other perhaps nematocera. --Ivar (talk) 17:39, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Жовна зелена (Picus viridis).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 09:31:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Green woodpecker (Picus viridis). Chernivtsi, Ukraine.

File:Boiga nigriceps Red cat snake.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 07:20:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Kakadu (AU), Kakadu National Park, Yellow Water -- 2019 -- 3782.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2019 at 06:17:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ngurrungurrudjba (Yellow Water) in Kakadu National Park, Northern Territory, Australia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Australia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 06:17, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 06:17, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Deserves a feature for composition but there seems to be a general sharpness issue about your Australian images. This is so soft I have to downscale to 50 percent to get it crisp sharp – well, that’s still around 7 megapixels. Can anything be done about the overexposed trees on the left background? They somehow spoil it a bit. --Kreuzschnabel 07:34, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Just two answers: First, the trees. The tree trunks are very bright, nearly without a dark bark - like a lot of trees in Australia. It was early in the morning and the sunlight is on the trees too. So I can't see an overexposed trunk. Sorry. Second, the sharpness. Yes, the photo was made without tripod. Yes, it was made sitting on a small (and swaying) boat. So 1/125 s may be a little bit long. Looking at pixel level there may be a quantum of blur. I've seen this starting with a 30 mpx camera. It's the limit of what affordable lenses can do. And additionally I used other sharpness parameters with Adobe Lightroom. I can improve this sharpness, but IMO it's not really an issue. --XRay talk 09:35, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I find no fault with the sharpness. The nearby trees and reflections are sharp. The background is somewhat unsharp at full size but IMO fine. I wanted to give my input on that now, although I'm not yet ready to vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:26, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I'll improve sharpness and midtone brightness as soon as possible. I'll to do this until tomorrow. --XRay talk 12:20, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done The improvements are done ... --XRay talk 16:15, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Just nice, but not really an amazing picture in my view. Water reflection is very ordinary. The sky is a bit boring. I miss something extra -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:16, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - Would you consider offering a crop with just the clump of trees by the lake and their reflection? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:22, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Good question. I don't think so. IMO 2:1 is a good choice. The trees at the left give depth. --XRay talk 05:41, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • But my suggested alternative would create a tighter composition. Photographer's choice, though. I will consider what I have in front of me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:05, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Your ideas are always good. I'll try it and if it is good enough, I'll upload the extracted image. OK? --XRay talk 07:10, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • That's kind of you to say, but it's completely up to you. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:00, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Kakadu (AU), Kakadu National Park, Yellow Water -- 2019 -- 3782 (crop).jpg

  • And here it is, the crop Ikan Kekek proposed. Thank you! --XRay talk 14:42, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This is actually a better crop than I was thinking of. I find this composition harmonious. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:47, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Tempered support I still think the tree at left could be cropped out, but it doesn't bother me enough to oppose. Daniel Case (talk) 15:34, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Crop too tight at the left -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:01, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Ikan Kekek, Johann Jaritz, Daniel Case, Basile Morin: It's now square format. --XRay talk 06:02, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I'm inclined to still support, but I preferred your previous crop. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:26, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Sorry, I'm dissatisfied with the square format too. So I reverted it back to the former crop. But I'll upload (but not nominate) the square format too. --XRay talk 11:21, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support this version only; the other has too much empty space where nothing is going on. Cmao20 (talk) 17:06, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Bruderwald Birnen-Stäubling (Lycoperdon pyriforme)-RM-20191014-01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 22:03:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

pear-shaped puffball or stump puffball (Lycoperdon pyriforme).Focus stack of 16 images.

File:Reichtstag, Berlín, Alemania, 2016-04-21, DD 31-33 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 21:39:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Reichstag (Parliament), Berlin, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Night view of the Reichstag, a historic edifice in Berlin, Germany, constructed to house the Imperial Diet of the German Empire. It was opened in 1894 and housed the Diet until 1933, when it was severely damaged after being set on fire. After World War II, the building fell into disuse; the parliament of the German Democratic Republic met in the Palast der Republik in East Berlin, while the parliament of the Federal Republic of Germany (the Bundestag) met in the Bundeshaus in Bonn. The ruined building was restaurated after German reunification on 3 October 1990, when it underwent a reconstruction led by architect Norman Foster. After its completion in 1999, it once again became the meeting place of the German parliament: the modern Bundestag. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 21:39, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:39, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support a bit windy. Charles (talk) 23:10, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Some ghosts above the hedges in the bottom-right — Rhododendrites talk |  23:27, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
    Rhododendrites: I removed those HDR artifacts, --Poco a poco (talk) 20:50, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 23:29, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:57, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Strong sky noise, f/5 could be more acurrate and faster to get a sharp image, a bit small if you see the camera used. Everything fixable --Wilfredor (talk) 02:33, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
    Wilfredor: I've reduced the noise. The f/11 is the optimal setting for the lens I used. Poco a poco (talk) 20:50, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Domob (talk) 09:39, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 13:39, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- while the quality is acceptable in most parts of the image, some parts appear to have too strong noise reduction, causing some elements to blend into the sky. For example, the two objects on either side of the dome. Also, I find the dynamic range insufficient for dark parts of the scene (despite HDR having been used). For comparison, File:Reichstag zur blauen Stunde, Berlin-Mitte, 1705312210, ako.jpg has much better details in the shadows as it was taken at blue hour, and it is also generally sharper thanks to the superior lens used. However, I do appreciate the longer focal length used in this photo, allowing the dome to be much more prominent. dllu (t,c) 07:52, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per dllu, this not finest on Commons. --Ivar (talk) 12:09, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per dllu. Other picture is far superior in sharpness, details, lighting and timing (blue hour prevents the foreground grass from disappearing into black, and creates better background for the building. -- Colin (talk) 12:42, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin; also, there's this sort of halo around the building that makes some of the more distant details of the rear roof look more drawn than photographed. Daniel Case (talk) 02:01, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per dllu. I would have supported if dllu hadn't linked to the other shot, but that one is unfortunately definitely superior, and so I don't think this is really the best on Commons. Cmao20 (talk) 17:04, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Catedral de Salzburgo, Salzburgo, Austria, 2019-05-19, DD 27-29 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 19:30:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dome of Salzburg Cathedral, Austria.

File:Rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta mulatta), male, Gokarna.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 18:08:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta mulatta), male in Nepal
  • I guess. He was sitting on his own. Charles (talk) 23:06, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Certainly a nice picture, but it doesn't look very special to me. Also it is quite soft, at least compared to some of your other spectacular wildlife shots. --Domob (talk) 05:42, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 23:19, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per Domob -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:16, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nice one.--Nirmal Dulal (talk) 04:34, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 15:45, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Maybe it could do with a tad more sharpening, but it's great considering the size. I'd rather slightly soft than oversharpened any day, at least too little sharpening can easily be fixed. Cmao20 (talk) 17:03, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:55, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Helmmycena (Mycena galericulata) (d.j.b.) 06.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 16:13:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Cirque de Navacelles (3).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 15:02:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cirque de Navacelles in the Massif Central, South of France
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/France
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 15:02, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 15:02, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love the composition with the road :) I think it’d work even better with the building on the left cropped out, so the cliffs on the left and right look symmetric. --Kreuzschnabel 15:21, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose The composition is indeed very nice (although I agree with Kreuzschnabel that the building should perhaps be removed completely), but I find the picture (especially some parts of it, e.g. in the right -- maybe a bad frame?) too soft. --Domob (talk) 16:52, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - To me, none of it is that sharp for a panorama. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:28, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 18:47, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think this image shows an issue which I sometimes have with your (very good) work, that it doesn't seem to have a whole lot of contrast. It looks a bit like what would happen if you pulled the shadows up and the highlights back, so that the image has a lot of midtones but no real light/dark areas. I also think it's a bit less sharp than your usual and could maybe do with less NR. I do like the composition though. Cmao20 (talk) 19:13, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I've been there and tried to make a panoramic myself, but I found it quite difficult. So I think this one passes the test with pretty good marks. MartinD (talk) 12:43, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Maison Carree in Nimes (9).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 14:57:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Maison Carrée in Nîmes, Gard, France
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects#Other architectural elements
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 14:57, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This image was awarded the 7th prize in the national contest of France in Wiki Loves Monuments 2019. Tournasol7 (talk) 14:58, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 14:57, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose It's a nice picture, but for me the very tight bottom crop doesn't work well (it looks incomplete). --Domob (talk) 16:50, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow --Michielverbeek (talk) 23:31, 9 December 2019 (UC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't find this special enough -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:52, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Basile.--Peulle (talk) 07:33, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Maybe this motif could produce an FP with the right crop, but I don't think this is it. However, it might be a good VI, depending on its competition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:30, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 05:10, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The crop doesn't work for me, with the cut-off bit on the right hand side. Good quality image though and I second Ikan's comments that it may well be VI. Cmao20 (talk) 18:55, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Gliophorus chromolimoneus - Ferndale Park.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 13:41:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gliophorus chromolimoneus

File:ODEEP ONE (ship, 1986), Sète.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 20:20:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

ODEEP ONE (ship, 1986)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment the stars are caused by diffraction, not dispersion. But I agree, not sure why f/16 was used. dllu (t,c) 07:54, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 08:13, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I wasn't wowed at the first sight but after a few seconds of looking at the picture I did get wowed :) --Podzemnik (talk) 19:49, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Reflection of lights, well, but the main subject is unclear. Ship hidden in the darkness. Overall not special enough. Quality image but no wow -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:47, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 13:42, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Domob. Daniel Case (talk) 00:11, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I disagree with all the opposing arguments above and would like to support, but would you consider cropping a little closer on the left to avoid having so many stray rays there? Or failing that, would it look good to crop further to the left and include that light source, if possible? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:47, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Podzemnik. Cmao20 (talk) 18:50, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:06, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:2018 01 (Blue) - Chaouen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 17:58:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Fbrandao.1963 - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 17:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 17:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportRhododendrites talk |  18:30, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Liking this - really interesting architecture. Cmao20 (talk) 18:59, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Two angels on my shoulder with this image - one wants to take away the doorstep carpet on the right to emphasize the blue theme; the other likes the carpet for the contrast it brings. Both agree that the image would benefit if the blip in the top right (marked with note) were cropped out. --GRDN711 (talk) 20:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question How do we know if the white balance is set correctly in an image like this? -- King of ♠ 01:05, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • How do you know the white balance is correct in a golden hour or sunset photo? Light is always subjective to the mood in the photo. Anyway, there are white details (albeight a bit yellowed with age) in both light and shadow in this photo (electrical wire and landline phone detalis) and things seems to be very "accurate" in this case. --Cart (talk) 09:26, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
King of In the image metadata show "White balance: Auto white balance". From my point of view, the camera found everything very golden or yellow due to the golden moment and I try to correct it by adding too much blue to the image. Cart, relativist fallacy is useful for anything, which means that it does not serve to explain anything in specific. --Wilfredor (talk) 14:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Not really sure where you are going with that comment. I mentioned the white objects since they can be used to check the WB. Seeing "white balance: Auto white balance" in the meta doesn't mean anything since it can be altered in post editing. Btw, check out the other photos in the category, Flickr and the article Chefchaouen about these blue houses. There seems to be a global conspiracy about wrong WB for these houses, or else they really are very blue. ;-) --Cart (talk) 14:32, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Cart you've convinced me --Wilfredor (talk) 15:23, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 21:53, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I've no idea if the blue is natural, but, yes or no, it doesn't appeal. Charles (talk) 23:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Whites look yellowish to me -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:43, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Moderate support; would be fuller support if cropped as suggested. Daniel Case (talk) 19:00, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - FWIW, I might support the suggested crop. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:48, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Charles. The scene is nice, but the blue certainly bothers me a lot. --Domob (talk) 05:40, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I'm confused. Chefchaouen is known as the "Blue City". Does it bother you that you're looking at blue, or are you unconvinced the blue is real? I guess if you don't like looking at this much blue, it's a matter of taste, but if you look through Category:Chefchaouen, you sure will see a lot of blue. It's real, alright. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:10, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It doesn't look real to me on the picture, but I well believe you it may be true. However, even in that case, the blue tone doesn't appeal to me, so that this may be a VI or QI but not FP (for my taste). --Domob (talk) 17:49, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Châteaux du Pays cathare - Château de Quéribus - 04.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 11:43:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the housing of the governor of the Château de Quéribus (Cucugnan, Département Aude, France) on the Canigou (2785m).
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 11:43, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 11:43, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yes, funny idea, but image quality on the landscape is mediocre, and the flashlit masonry taking up 75 percent of the frame doesn’t look really nice. --Kreuzschnabel 12:12, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the idea is very good and the implementation successful --Milseburg (talk) 14:38, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Executed pretty well, I think. The resolution is sufficient that the frame-in-a-frame doesn't suffer too much. — Rhododendrites talk |  18:16, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not perfect quality but overall a good idea well done. Cmao20 (talk) 18:59, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:11, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice idea, and to me the quality of the landscape is certainly good enough. --Domob (talk) 05:50, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, it's a nice idea but I don't get wowed neither by the landscape or by the wall. The wall seems to be a bit overcooked (direct flash I guess?) and the landscape doesn't have a straight point too look at. I wish there was a more distinctive feature like here. --Podzemnik (talk) 19:54, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel and Podzemnik. — Draceane talkcontrib. 21:19, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Podzemnik Poco a poco (talk) 21:48, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question a tighter crop? see note. Charles (talk) 23:14, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Châteaux du Pays cathare - Château de Quéribus - 04a.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Crop as suggested by Charles --Llez (talk) 05:52, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This composition really works for me. Sharpness is not optimal, etc., but it's good enough for me to support a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:44, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Much better, but the harsh flashlight on the inside wall at almost the same brightness as the sunlit parts still doesn’t appeal to me. Just looks unreal, can’t be "true", there’s two competing light sources here that won’t mix. Flashlight reduced to ⅛ or even less (plus softener) might have worked. --Kreuzschnabel 07:11, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I think I could support this if something were done to dim the flash on the wall. Daniel Case (talk) 18:55, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Flash dimmed as proposed --Llez (talk) 19:11, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support either — Rhododendrites talk |  19:19, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support much better Charles (talk) 16:37, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Fin Garden Kushak.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 07:26:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fin Garden Kushak in kashan.jpg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Amirpashaei - uploaded by Amirpashaei - nominated by Amirpashaei -- Amirpashaei (talk) 07:26, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Amirpashaei (talk) 07:26, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Domob (talk) 08:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment strange artefacts on the water, how is this photo taken? No metadata either. --Ivar (talk) 14:15, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @Iifar: thanks. you're right. I adjusted artifacts problem. this is an HDR panorama picture with 24mm tilt shift lens--Amirpashaei (talk) 16:11, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment the composition is very good and the subject interesting, so it works well as a thumbnail, but there are technical issues at full size. There's chromatic aberration (a bit in the water, a lot in the trees) and some artifacts on the people in the background. The interior quality is good for FP IMO, nice high resolution, but the outside light is really harsh and has lost some detail. — Rhododendrites talk |  18:27, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @Rhododendrites: thanks. you're right . I fixed chromatic aberration. and I fixed artifacts on the people too.--Amirpashaei (talk) 19:30, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Gnosis (talk) 18:28, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:10, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Ultimately too soft and the trees outside a little overexposed. It seems like there was a long exposure, which might better explain this, but in the absence of metadata we can't know.GA candidate.svg Weak support now Daniel Case (talk) 04:22, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose per Daniel. I also feel like the colors outside the structure are a little off. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:04, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @Ikan Kekek: , **@Daniel Case:, thanks for your useful critiques. I improved the light in exterior section. say to me if another improvement needed. I took this picture with 5 frame with tilt shift lens and every frame contain 5 pictures with difference of levels of exposure. (HDR panorama). 6D canon. 24 mm tilt shift lens. iso 100. f:14 exposure time (1/30 , 1/15 , 1/8 , 1/4, 1/2 ). --Amirpashaei (talk) 09:06, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - That looks much better. Do you think it's a true representation of what you saw? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Well then it has my approval. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:21, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support thanks for the fixes. — Rhododendrites talk |  18:44, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Amirpashaei, I think your category is too general. You should add "#Iran" at the end. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:13, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • And in your other nominee? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:52, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • sure. I will add to them too--Amirpashaei (talk) 06:30, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

File:A tourist lady in Jameh Mosque of Isfahan.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2019 at 07:17:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A tourist lady in Jameh Mosque of Isfahan
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Amirpashaei - uploaded by Amirpashaei - nominated by Amirpashaei -- Amirpashaei (talk) 07:17, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Amirpashaei (talk) 07:17, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose blurry lady doesn't work for me, sorry. --Ivar (talk) 14:17, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @Iifar: blurry person in architectural photography for show scales not problem--Amirpashaei (talk) 14:54, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The more I think about it, the blurry person doesn't actually bother me. It is indeed good for showing the scale. Cmao20 (talk) 18:53, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Cmao20. --Pugilist (talk) 22:02, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice compo, but the blurry lady plus the blown areas at her feet and at the windows, chromatic aberration on the brickwork. Difficult scene that might require at least three combined shots (lady, overall, windows) to make it really good. --Cart (talk) 11:46, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support If I pixel-peep, she's blurry. At full screen she's fine and like a painting all primary colours (yellow, red, blue). She's standing exactly in the spots of light from the window, and framed by the arch in the rear wall. And the brickwork with spirals and diagonals is well described with light cement contrasting. Yes I wish the glare from the window was handled better, but it can be really hard when you point your lens straight at a bright window. I do hope she isn't photoshopped in. Could you save your JPG with some EXIF data and an embedded colourspace please. -- Colin (talk) 12:55, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Regretfully I agree with Cart... Tournasol7 (talk) 15:07, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @W.carter:, @Colin:, @Tournasol7:, @Iifar:, you're right. thanks for your nice critiques. I improved the light. I fixed chromatic aberration and I improved blurry lady. I think because the picture merged from 3 shots(HDR)photoshop cant save file with EXIF.--Amirpashaei (talk) 17:00, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks, that's better, move to Symbol support vote.svg Support. For the exif, you can take one of the photos and add this as a top layer to it and merge into one. I know it will not cover all three shots, but it will be close enough and better that no exif. --Cart (talk) 17:18, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm not so worried about the EXIF data for camera lens, exposure, etc (though it is nice to add that detail for a complex shot to the description). You may have lost the colour profile when doing the HDR so may have to assign one again (e.g. sRGB) and don't use Photoshop's 'save for web' but instead use the save option that preserves exif. That way the image has a colour profile and we all see the same colours. Btw, it is a shame the lady's primary colours are not so vivid in the new version. Perhaps that is realistic, though -- you can judge from your individual exposures. What are you using for HDR? --Colin (talk) 17:48, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • @W.carter: thanks again Mr carter . The way you said it didn't work. the photo taken with 24mm tilt shift lens. 6D canon. f:14 , iso 100, exposure time (2,4,8) seconds.--Amirpashaei (talk) 17:40, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Too bad, it usually works for me. I've added the Template:Photo Information to the file, you can use that instead. I've filled in some of what you wrote here, but please correct if I got something wrong and feel free to fill in the rest. Also, I'm a "Miss" not a "Mr". :-) --Cart (talk) 17:54, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • excuse me Miss carter for my mistake. thanks for your useful information and your kindness.--Amirpashaei (talk) 18:01, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Better now but still has a lot of CA. Daniel Case (talk) 20:23, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ivar Poco a poco (talk) 21:46, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @Poco a poco: I fixed chromatic aberration, blurry lady and artifact. is this another problem Mr Silva?--Amirpashaei (talk) 12:00, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Many improvements since the original nomination. OK for me. --GRDN711 (